Very Computer

Hello everybody:

I'm a newbee of linux. Yesterday, I used MS Windows (it's a metaphoric
expression! ;-)). In fact, I use Windows ocassionally.

A fact that I shocked is the facility that any user have in Windows
for install programs rather than Linux, in which the installation
tasks is for root user, or user's with more privileges.

Actually, there is only the facility. At last, this is only a question
of persmissions of user (for example in Win NT "only" a Administrator
can install a program): the _main_ difference about installation in
Windows and in linux is the GUI comfortable aspect.

In windows the majorty of installations offer a GUI "friend" aspect,
such that the young boy (an even a monkey!: we can only say allways
"yes: we accept...") can install any program (well, "any" not, but the
majorty of these). On the other hand, in linux, we can install,
typically, the programs with targz protocol or. if "we have lucky",
with rpm protocol. So there is not any graphical simple way of install
a program.

Essentially, the installation of programs in linux imply that the user
has to have a knowledge of her system, theorycally and practically,
and in Windows, the user can know nothing about what he/she are doing.

I think that one of the purposes that linux user wish is that the
windows user pass to linux. But I think that they will not pass if we
do not make a applet that allows graphical and easy installations:
more windows user never will emigrate to linux if they have to do "too
much" for install a program or if, previously, they have to "study a
lot of manuals of linux and related".

I know what you will say: that the actual installation (specially with
targz protocol) allows to installation user to change any parameter
during this. But for example this is less true with rpm protocol: rpm
installation process is, almost, automatically. Mainly: more simplex
installation is less configurated installation; I'm in agreement with
it. But why simplex installation are, "allways", non-graphical in
linux?

Why there is not a graphical applet that executes in background rpm
and that allows to install rpm packages automatically and
graphically?. This actually exists: the rpm executed in X, but I think
that this is already too complex for newbees.

And why not do a GUI interface that executes targz without the
knowledge of the user, that offers a "expert mode" in which we can set
all the parameters that we could, and a "simple mode" for the typical
windows user?

All of these is an ingenuous question. What do you think about it?

Best regards,
Xan

PS: Already a newbee user... .

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
NotDashEscaped: You need GnuPG to verify this message

you sure spent a lot of time writing stuff just to ask if there is
a graphical installer. BTW, yes there is and is sometimes specific
to the distro.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 Michael J. Tobler: motorcyclist, surfer,  #    Black holes result
 skydiver, and author: "Inside Linux",     #   when God divides the  
 "C++ HowTo", "C++ Unleashed"              #     universe by zero

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE9QcC4tTveLPAHcDIRAntfAJ9u343mGGIwga6G1+IlpxrE2AYIRgCfW1on
qVJrUch/qSwN/kgyKwtzohw=
=nw2l
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Quote:> In windows the majorty of installations offer a GUI "friend" aspect,
> such that the young boy (an even a monkey!: we can only say allways
> "yes: we accept...") can install any program (well, "any" not, but the
> majorty of these). On the other hand, in linux, we can install,
> typically, the programs with targz protocol or. if "we have lucky",
> with rpm protocol. So there is not any graphical simple way of install
> a program.

Young boys and monkey's shouldn't be Linux administrators. And ".rpm"
doesn't really help all of us.

Quote:

> I think that one of the purposes that linux user wish is that the
> windows user pass to linux. But I think that they will not pass if we
> do not make a applet that allows graphical and easy installations:
> more windows user never will emigrate to linux if they have to do "too
> much" for install a program or if, previously, they have to "study a
> lot of manuals of linux and related".

I don't really think most Linux users really want to sell Linux to
everyone. When I have to fix something on a Windows Machine, I often
mention to the owner that "This wouldn't be a problem on Linux". But
Personally I'd say if someone is not content with Windows, but doesn't
want to learn Linux, then they should get a Mac and use OSX. They'll
have the Stability of BSD and the ease of Mac.

Quote:

> Why there is not a graphical applet that executes in background rpm
> and that allows to install rpm packages automatically and
> graphically?. This actually exists: the rpm executed in X, but I think
> that this is already too complex for newbees.

You have a keyboard in front of you, don't you think it's a bit
insulting to your intellegence to Never be expected to touch thst
keyboard ?

--

  From craving arises sorrow, from craving arises fear, but he who is
  freed from craving has no sorrow and certainly no fear. 216

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In a moment of clarity Xan had the following epiphany

<sniped for brevity>

Quote:

> Why there is not a graphical applet that executes in
> background rpm and that allows to install rpm packages
> automatically and graphically?. This actually exists:
> the rpm executed in X, but I think that this is already
> too complex for newbees.

I'm using Sourcemage Linux, which is not aimed at new
users, to install a program I do the following complex
steps.

1) run sorcery from the menu
2) go to install
3) select the programs I want to install from convenient categories
   (games, net, editors, doc etc.) displayed in a pleasant GUI
4) click OK

This is even easier then installing on micros~1 windows,
no need to reboot, all dependencies are handled
automatically.

uninstalling is just as easy.

Quote:

> And why not do a GUI interface that executes targz
> without the knowledge of the user, that offers a "expert
> mode" in which we can set all the parameters that we
> could, and a "simple mode" for the typical windows user?

There are already several window managers which let you do this.

Cheers

Joel
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE9Qg6fWxU5n0eFaBkRAo4AAJ9Y58DYTIJLa+rFShnvXr44GMVN4wCgmHxi
G4F4cXoBhBW6ZpLC4bCT4AQ=
=2uS0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
Sourcemage GNU/Linux                         /~\  ASCII Ribbon campaign
Linux so advanced it may as well be magic    \_/ stop HTML mail and news
x11 & doc section maintainer                 / \
http://search.keyserver.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0x47856819

Sorry: perhaps, this thread has to have different title!.
What is/are this graphical installer?.

Thanks in advance,
Xan.

Well, "shouldn't" it's a big word. Simply imagine that a friend of 12
years old buy his first personal computer. And he is a complete newbee
of informatics, he does not know nothing about informatics... .
Probably, his PC have Win installed on his computer. After one year,
he knows a little bit about informatic, and about Windows. But, after
two years, he is tired of blue screens, and, casualities of life, he
ask me "Is there any operative system that has not blue screens, more
stable, secured, etc?". What can I say him?.

I say that I use linux and that it works very well. Then he install
linux in his computer and, for example, he want to reproduce a DVD and
there is not any DVD-player on his computer. And he see that xine is
good and he want to install it.

What can he do?. He "should" ask for a "linux administrator" in the
pages of newspaper? He "has" to be his own linux administrator. And
it's a reality.

I know that the phylosophy of the unix/linux systems is another than
windows: there is a super user, root user, that controls all the
programs and processes that are installed on a computer, and the rest
of the user only use this computer.

But in the home, more users are, at same time, root users and "plain"
user. And in more cases their knowledge of informatic is poor. They
choose linux because it has not blue screens.

Probably, this are not the majorty of users, but I know more of these.

And rpm can help them: it's not the same install an application that
is presented in targz format than in rpm format. With rpm, a user only
have to do "rpm -Uhv [packagename]" for install or update, and in
targz ... .

Quote:

> > I think that one of the purposes that linux user wish is that the
> > windows user pass to linux. But I think that they will not pass if we
> > do not make a applet that allows graphical and easy installations:
> > more windows user never will emigrate to linux if they have to do "too
> > much" for install a program or if, previously, they have to "study a
> > lot of manuals of linux and related".

> I don't really think most Linux users really want to sell Linux to
> everyone. When I have to fix something on a Windows Machine, I often
> mention to the owner that "This wouldn't be a problem on Linux". But
> Personally I'd say if someone is not content with Windows, but doesn't
> want to learn Linux, then they should get a Mac and use OSX. They'll
> have the Stability of BSD and the ease of Mac.

I think that this is the main problem: the prerequissites of a user.
In linux, a user has to know "a little bit of" informatic, and in
windows not. If we discriminate against new informatic user, what kind
of persons we are?

I think that we could have two "systems" of kinds of installation: one
for simple user and another for users who know all about linux/unix,
informatics...

And Mac: it's an incompatible systems (lastly, there are PowerPC,
but....).
I don't know BSD. Sorry.

Quote:

> > Why there is not a graphical applet that executes in background rpm
> > and that allows to install rpm packages automatically and
> > graphically?. This actually exists: the rpm executed in X, but I think
> > that this is already too complex for newbees.

> You have a keyboard in front of you, don't you think it's a bit
> insulting to your intellegence to Never be expected to touch thst
> keyboard ?

There are a non-keyboard ways for interacting with my PC. For example
voice recognitions, mouse. I think that we have to choose the way that
we want. But we have to have the possibility: what do you think if the
one possibility for access to your computer were in Morse code?. I
think that few few persons use PC in this situtation. And if you have
to do this each time you want to install a program?

Xan.

What are these?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
NotDashEscaped: You need GnuPG to verify this message

http://www.plig.org/xwinman/
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 Michael J. Tobler: motorcyclist, surfer,  #    Black holes result
 skydiver, and author: "Inside Linux",     #   when God divides the  
 "C++ HowTo", "C++ Unleashed"              #     universe by zero

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE9RCUytTveLPAHcDIRAvBMAJ0fxyErDfOAxMbrxyQepL72XVy8ggCfVou5
KStph+WIIUhx3XoMYafo3t8=
=+yrm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Sorry, I hate the word shouldn't, I guess I let it slip there. But my
answer to the second part is Mac OSX.  

--

  From craving arises sorrow, from craving arises fear, but he who is
  freed from craving has no sorrow and certainly no fear. 216

I "forgive" you.
For the second part, well...I don't see as you: Mac OSX is very
intuitive, and even compatible with MS-DOS/Windows data and programs
(the lasts, in less mesure), but the main problem that I see is that
the production of programs in MacOSX is a bit less than in Linux. That
is, the number of (useful) programs that appear per month is less
(more less I think) than in Linux.

And another problem: stability. In MacOSX I have had hang problems. In
Linux, rarely. [I have used ocassionally (two or three times) Macs and
dayly linux. So if I had problems in MacOSX, this operative system is
not too much stable (or I'm an incredible beta-tester!!! ;-) )]

And, open source?

But, anyway, thank you for your opinion!.

Best regards,
Xan.